The Experts below are selected from a list of 48 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Rex H. Hartson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Cognitive, physical, sensory, and functional Affordances in interaction design
2014Co-Authors: Rex H. HartsonAbstract:…they may indeed look, but not perceive, and may indeed listen, but not understand Mark 4.12 (NRSV) In reaction to Norman’s [1999] essay on misuse of the term Affordance in human-computer interaction literature, this article is a concept paper affirming the importance of this powerful concept, reinforcing Norman’s distinctions of terminology, and expanding on the usefulness of the concepts in terms of their application to interaction design and evaluation. We define and use four complementary types of Affordance in the context of interaction design and evaluation: Cognitive Affordance, physical Affordance, sensory Affordance, and functional Affordance. The terms Cognitive Affordance (Norman’s perceived Affordance) and physical Affordance (Norman’s real Affordance) refer to parallel and equally important usability concepts for interaction design, to which sensory Affordance plays a supporting role. We argue that the concept of physical Affordance carries a mandatory component of utility or purposeful action (functional Affordance). Finally, we provide guidelines to help designers think about how these four kinds of Affordance work together naturally in contextualized HCI design or evaluation
-
Cognitive, physical, sensory, and functional Affordances in interaction design
2003Co-Authors: Rex H. HartsonAbstract:Abstract. In reaction to Norman’s (1999) essay on misuse of the term Affordance in human-computer interaction literature, this article is a concept paper affirming the importance of this powerful concept, reinforcing Norman’s distinctions of terminology, and expanding on the usefulness of the concepts in terms of their application to interaction design and evaluation. We define and use four complementary types of Affordance in the context of interaction design and evaluation: Cognitive Affordance, physical Affordance, sensory Affordance, and functional Affordance. The terms Cognitive Affordance (Norman’s perceived Affordance) and physical Affordance (Norman’s real Affordance) refer to parallel and equally important usability concepts for interaction design, to which sensory Affordance plays a supporting role. We argue that the concept of physical Affordance carries a mandatory component of utility or purposeful action (functional Affordance). Finally, we provide guidelines to help designers think about how these four kinds of Affordance work together naturally in contextualized HCI design or evaluation. 1
H. Rex Hartson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Cognitive, physical, sensory, and functional Affordances in interaction design
Behaviour & Information Technology, 2003Co-Authors: H. Rex HartsonAbstract:In reaction to Norman's (1999) essay on misuse of the term Affordance in human-computer interaction literature, this article is a concept paper affirming the importance of this powerful concept, reinforcing Norman's distinctions of terminology, and expanding on the usefulness of the concepts in terms of their application to interaction design and evaluation. We define and use four complementary types of Affordance in the context of interaction design and evaluation: Cognitive Affordance, physical Affordance, sensory Affordance, and functional Affordance. The terms Cognitive Affordance (Norman's perceived Affordance) and physical Affordance (Norman's real Affordance) refer to parallel and equally important usability concepts for interaction design, to which sensory Affordance plays a supporting role. We argue that the concept of physical Affordance carries a mandatory component of utility or purposeful action (functional Affordance). Finally, we provide guidelines to help designers think about how these fo...
Marta Jorba - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Husserlian horizons, Cognitive Affordances and motivating reasons for action
Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 2020Co-Authors: Marta JorbaAbstract:According to Husserl’s phenomenology, the intentional horizon is a general structure of experience. However, its characterisation beyond perceptual experience has not been explored yet. This paper aims, first, to fill this gap by arguing that there is a viable notion of Cognitive horizon that presents features that are analogous to features of the perceptual horizon. Secondly, it proposes to characterise a specific structure of the Cognitive horizon—that which presents possibilities for action—as a Cognitive Affordance. Cognitive Affordances present Cognitive elements as opportunities for mental action (i.e., a problem affording trying to solve it, a thought affording calculating, an idea affording reflection). Thirdly, it argues that postulating Cognitive Affordances helps to unfold a rational dimension of thinking by conceiving of them as motivating reasons for action, something that in turn provides an argument for the experienced character of Cognitive Affordances.
Hamari Juho - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Effect of Operating in Many Realities on Memory: An Experiment on Memory Recognition in Extended Realities
2021Co-Authors: Xi Nannan, Chen Juan, Gama Filipe, Korkeila Henry, Hamari JuhoAbstract:Extended reality (XR) such as VR and AR have been increasingly adopted across domains in Cognitively challenging activities such as learning, shopping, and gaming among others. There are a few concerns about the inferior Cognitive Affordance of XR-mediated functioning, e.g., with respect to memory retention. For better understanding how different XR technologies influence memory performance (e.g., recognition), we examine the effects of VR and AR -mediation on the ability to remember (i.e., recognize afterward) text and image-based information based on a 2 × 2 between-subject experiment (n = 155). The results indicate that VR had a negative main effect on text-based information recognition but no effect on image-based information recognition. AR had no significant main effect on the recognition of either information types. Overall, the findings as further supported by the interaction effects analysis, suggest that for memory recognition, it is always best to have a fully physical (no-AR & no-VR) or fully digital environment (AR & VR) compared to having either VR or AR alone
Lee Kyoung Hak - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
A Study on Utilization Plan for Affordance Theory-based Virtual Reality Contents
Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 2016Co-Authors: Kim Ji Hye, Kim Jin Gon, Lee Kyoung HakAbstract:Background/Objectives: Virtual reality content is changing into a form of pursuing experience and convenience as it gradually emphasizes user interaction, and user-centric designs and interfaces like UI/UX are performing important roles in creating a new communication and interaction. Thus, when designing content for a virtual environment, a design environment that allows users to focus within the virtual space, toward the Cognitive factor, must be created by means of user comprehension and experience. Methods/Statistical Analysis: Current virtual reality content requires adaptive learning in terms of new device control, with various devices and interaction functions. Hence, studies, in accordance with the Cognitive process from virtual reality, are necessary in order to achieve an effective experience based on virtual reality content, because user needs in regards to comprehension and convenience toward new environments are being generated. The present study analyzes virtual reality contents based on Cognitive Affordance theory through information and behavior detected by visual perception in order to achieve efficiency for convenient environments, utility, and user participation expansion, which is achieved by restricting contents to those only of the CAVE system type. Findings: The sub-elements of Cognitive Affordance theory are divided into perception, function, and behavior, and the data analyzing the correlation in accordance with each type of virtual reality content establishes a theory for an efficient virtual reality content usage plan, presenting a utilization model. Research on contents based on Cognitive Affordance has been positively affected by content understanding and focus, affected from the perception factor out of each Cognitive Affordance element. Application/Improvements: Such results show that more convenient environments for users will be built and content satisfaction will be increased, and may be presented as an efficient utilization plan for virtual reality content development.